Nykonax

i cant even park straight normally you think i can do that shit backwards?

wtf reno and velv and mcwolf

 

the vhl cant handle thsi

wtf reno and velv

this cant be real

goat

4 minutes ago, jfaly said:

1) What are your expectations for your player this season?

 

2) Who do you think will lead the M in scoring this season?

 

3) Where do you think the Reapers will end the season in the standings?

 

4) What team are you most looking forward to competing with this season?

 

5) What are your goals for your player this season?

 

6) Where do you think your favourite NHL team will finish in the upcoming season? If you don't watch the NHL, feel free to tell me about your favourite pro-league team in anything else!

1. I'd like to get a few points
2. Our boy Aky
3. Hopefully 1st, but as long as we're in playoffs I'm happy

4. Mexico, I GM'd them back in the 60's so would like to beat them
5) I'd like to win a championship. I've lost in the finals every M season I've been in I think
6) The Canucks are probably going to suck, as long as we don't make any dumbass UFA signings I dont care about their performance

Hi All,

I have nothing better to do so I'm back with another statistical analyses. I have come a long way since my last one using basic bitch Z-scores, taking 2 more whole statistic classes in University since then! So I figured what better to do than to procrastinate real work and reuse code from my most recently submitted university assignment and apply it to the VHL. This time we are using decision trees!

Decision trees can be thought of as statistical flowcharts, and are usually used for classification problems (example: here is some information about a mushroom, based on all this previous information about mushrooms, is this one going to be poisonous?), but it can also be used for regression predictions. Essentially they look at a bunch of previous data and it's outcome, and then decides the most important parameters and uses those in a flowchart to determine the expected outcome.

In our case, I have scraped the last 6 seasons of VHL Hybrid player attributes (STHS ones from Portal) and the stats from that season, and will be using it to build essentially a flowchart to predict how many points players will get.

Anyways, here's the flowchart. Sorry darkmode users



This can be interpreted like a flowchart. Look at the question, if the answer is yes, go left, if the answer is no, go right. The top number in the circle is the expected number of points, the bottom number is the % of people in the category. For example, if you have a PH > 82, ST < 80, and SK > 80, you would expect to score 67 points (right, left, right). It's interesting to see what variables the model sees as important cutoff points, DF and SC don't appear at all in here, whereas its only PH/SK/ST. My theory on this is that these attributes aren't really tied to anything and have their own ratios, allowing you to increase them much higher, making your STHS attributes higher relative to your TPE compared to someone upgrading DF and SC.

Now is this accurate? Eh, kind of, depends how much of a margin of error you're willing to accept.


Here's a histogram of the differences of the actual points from the prediction. Each bar represents 5 points. So for example, about 40 predictions were 5 under, while >60 were 5 over. If you want exact numbers, 22% of predictions were within 5, 43% within 10, and 74% within 20. Which honestly I think isn't bad, considering the variability of STHS. Especially at the higher ends where you're predicted a max of 86 points but still end up in the 100's or 120's.

We can run the same analyses on goals and assists:
Goals:

27% of predictions within 3, 43% within 5, 72% within 10

Assists:

22% within 3, 36% within 5, 59% within 10

Conclusion: I can make a pretty bad prediction of how many points you'll score. But if you're willing to accept a margin of error of 40 points, I have a 98.5% chance of predicting how many points you'll get successfully. For real though, I think it's interesting to see what variables the tree chooses as important, as traditional attributes aren't really present, as it puts more emphasis on PH, SK, and ST. My theory on this is that these attributes can be upgraded with good ratios compared to SC and DF, which means if you're spending your TPE on these while someone is spending there's on SC and DF, you'll have a higher PH/SK compared to their DF/SC, which means you have more effective STHS attributes for your TPE. I think this can give some interesting insight to build paths and advice, as it may be beneficial to get as much STHS attributes as possible, even if they aren't the optimal ones, as you'll just end up statchecking other players.

I'd like to follow this up with VHLM analysis, but not sure how reliable that will be considering the more changing nature of player attributes during the season. Also if anyone is wondering why I didn't just use regression, it's cause these are cooler. (And I can't write as much on regression). But here's a regression model anyways


Adjusted R-squared = 0.5369

Also if anyone wants the dataset let me know and I can send you it

2 hours ago, Enorama said:

@Nykonax what do I keep telling you

 

 

@Enorama

shl thunderdome shut down so you came here, nice

cant believe you guys fired cow smh. grats @Zetterberg

I like it, I think under the current system it kind of feels too slow to upgrade an STHS attribute especially in the 80s or 90s. Takes multiple weeks of earning to get like +0.8 to an attribute. So having some sort of solution that can "speed" that progression up makes sense, would feel satisfying buying equipment and having it upgrade an attribute by 3 when normally that would take a few weeks.

Would we want some sort of limit on equipment? Like you can only have 2 pieces or whatever.

 

Player Information

Username: Nykonax

Player Name: Eno Velvson

Recruited From: Returning

Age: 50

Position: C

Height: 75 in.

Weight: 220 lbs.

Birthplace: Canada

Player Page

@VHLM GM

I mean personally I think Las Vegas' Logo is pretty similar in terms of complexity, and they've been one of the most successful VHLM teams over the last bit. So I kind of think the not getting recreates because of the logo and being bad is just cope. Also if you're talking about meaning then feel like the current 21st logo has way more meaning.

 

But the other logo is nice, and I'm not opposed or really care what happens at all.

4 hours ago, Baozi said:

Just a gentle reminder that we'll be ending feedback and continuing with the revisions after tomorrow unless more time is warranted.

I mean it'd be nice to know what revisions are being considered if you want BoG opinion. Otherwise I think most people have said their piece?

1 hour ago, Baozi said:

I think certain topics (like roe v wade as example again) to me are clearly right/wrong

I think the key words here are "to me". Why should the head mod/mod team in general be the ones deciding what opinions are allowed on the forums and what opinions arent? Obviously you're coming from a place of making VHL inclusive and hate-free, which I respect, but if someone else was head-mod and they thought that pro-choice was killing babies and is therefore clearly wrong, so they punish anyone who shares a pro-choice opinion, it'd be ridiculous, because like I said, why does their personal moral standards dictate the standards of the entire community? So I think your moral standards also shouldn't be dictating the community, even if they are from the other side.

 

I think the only things punishable should be direct hate, like direct racism/homophobia/misogyny. Not having an opinion on a topic that could be stretched to fit a definition of hate, like you're doing with supporting pro-life means you don't give women a choice which means you hate women. If someone wants to share an opinion on a controversial topic and does it in a respectful way that doesn't insult anyone, I think personally let them. And if people in the VHL don't like their opinion they can choose to not like the person and to just laugh at their stupid opinion, or engage in respectful debate. Otherwise we just alienate members who may have slightly different personal beliefs but otherwise aren't causing problems.

46 minutes ago, Spartan said:

I think the M commissioners handled this appropriately after the mod process finished

stonks

13 hours ago, Gustav said:

he aims to take home (I think) Mexico's first-ever Cup

think hylands or adv won in the mid 70s?

good riddance

where my 2018 gang at @Esso2264

good but sounds WAY too much like Riot Games Patch Notes

@Esso2264 run it back?

8 hours ago, Shindigs said:

I've proposed the idea elsewhere, so obviously I agree with it. But 450 isn't enough. I'd say as high as 550 would be reasonable still. Does this mean some players *can* play their whole career and never hit the VHL? Yes! Does this already happen? Yes! Could they talk to their VHL GM and still get called up as early as 300 if there is roster space and they'd prefer to play a depth role in the VHL? Yes!

 

Speaking as like a 6tpe/week person I'm not really sure how I feel about this. I don't really know the math on this but my player is 930 TPE and in my 9th total season now. I started my career max earning for my draft season + maybe a season after that, so had 350 TPE at draft. So I've earned like 600 TPE in 8 seasons clicking + a small amount more. With 550 VHLE cap I wouldn't have been in the VHL until like my 3rd season on my player, and if I didn't max earn before the draft I probably wouldn'tve made it to the VHL until like my 5th or something. That's crazy to me, and I'm not sure I like it.

 

Now obviously the answer to this is just earn more, or ask your GM to call you up earlier. But why are we forcing people to put in more effort just to play in the VHL. I'm of the opinion that you should be able to just do welfare and practice facility and eventually end up with a somewhat decent player and career. If you want to be a superstar then you have to do tasks. But I think this is just too punishing. Or you could ask your GM to call you up, but I think the only teams that will have space are the awful bottom teams, and then that's not fun. Maybe this is just too complaining, but as someone who's about to retire and considering recreating, I really feel like if this change went through I wouldn't want to recreate just to spend more seasons in the minors than the actual VHL.

 

8 hours ago, Shindigs said:

But do we really want that? Do we want players putting in like 10 minutes of ice time at the VHL level more than them being 100+ point 25 minute superstars at the VHLE level? If so why do we even have the VHLE at that point? And why do we call it a "competitive" league, if we'd rather have their star players be depth pieces that get no playtime in the VHL?

I would much rather play 10 minutes of icetime in a depth role and have a chance to win and have a career in a real league than score points in a meaningless league. We can pretend the VHLE is "competitive" all we want, but I think that only means teams are allowed to play to win instead of play to retain like the VHLM. No one cares about the VHLE, and that's not a fault of the E, it's just not the main league. VHLM and VHLE stats and careers are meaningless, just like no one wants to be an AHL all-star, they'd all rather be in the NHL (i assume)

@Alexdo your numbers include bonuses?